Rajasthan High Court
CRLMB/4112/2026 of VINOD BAVRIYA SON OF SHRI ROOPSINGH, Vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN on 14 May 2026
JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 4112/2026 Vinod Bavriya Son of Shri Roopsingh, Aged About 25 Years, Resident of Village Rudkapura, Tehsil Baadi, Police Station Sadar, District Dholpur, At Present Tenant Hari Nagar Colony, Village
[2026:RJ-JP:20506]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No. 4112/2026
Vinod Bavriya Son of Shri Roopsingh, Aged About 25 Years, Resident of Village Rudkapura, Tehsil Baadi, Police Station Sadar, District Dholpur, At Present Tenant Hari Nagar Colony, Village Palwal, Police Station Dehat, District Palwal, Hariyana. (At Present Accused Petitioner Confined In Central Jaipur Jaipur)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s)
:
Mr. K. L. Meena
Mr. Narendra Agrawal
For Respondent(s)
:
Mr. Amit Kumar Gupta
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA
Judgment / Order
14/05/2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. The instant second bail application has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 on behalf of accused-petitioner in connection with FIR No.423/2025 registered at Police Station Mansarovar, District Jaipur City (South) for offence under Section 304(2) of B.N.S.
2. Heard
3. Considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the accused-petitioner as well as learned Public Prosecutor who oppose the bail application.
4. As per the contents of the first information report, the allegation against the accused-petitioner is of chain snatching.
[2026:RJ-JP:20506] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-4112/2026]
5. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the offence as alleged against the accused-petitioner is triable by the Court of learned Magistrate and after completion of investigation, the Police has already submitted the charge-sheet. Learned counsel also submits that the learned trial Court has framed the charge against the accused-petitioner on 13.10.2025 and even after passing of more than six months, the trial has not been concluded and the accused-petitioner is entitled to be released on bail in view of the specific provisions of Section 480(6) B.N.S.S.
6. Taking into consideration the allegations against the accused- petitioner and so also the fact that the accused-petitioner is in custody since 02.08.2025 and the offence alleged against the accused-petitioner is triable by the learned Magistrate, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits or demerits of the case, deems just and proper to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail.
7. Accordingly, this second bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner named above shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- together with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before the Court concerned on all the dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. (GANESH RAM MEENA),J Prateek/51(s)